View Full Version : hiking with 1 year old recommended?
teasipper
05-26-2009, 13:08
We want to thru hike the AT 2010. Because, we'd both be in between jobs and moving, we thought it'd be a perfect time to hike the AT. However, we have a one year old boy. Can the AT be done with a baby? Can anyone recommend any resources to check out?
I met a couple on the PCT once with both a baby and a toddler. Most people here probably won't agree but I say go for it, try it at least. You don't have to go back that many generations to realize people and babys have survived far more than you will encounter on the AT! I think it's so great that yall would even consider this that I had to comment on the ladies thread.:o
Wife and I used something called "Ava's Kid Carrier" I did a search, but no luck.
They are simple in design a rectangle of cloth about the size of an 1YO torso with two small short straps at the bottom and bigger long long straps at the top.
All material a heavy soft velour.
You can tie a kid on you six to Sunday -very comfortable for kid and carrier.
We were on the trail and off the trail a lot in those days, early '80s.
The important thing is you and the kid felt like a single unit.
You could wear the kid on front and a pack on the back -if you're pretty stout. :)
If I can find ours I'd post a picture, if interested, PM me.
Wouldn't be terribly difficult to reproduce it.
jjj
gravityman
05-26-2009, 13:36
Good luck! It won't be easy, but if you want to try it, go for it! We couldn't get our 1 year old to sleep in a backpacking tent at all, and I'm sure a shelter would be very uncomfortable for everyone involved.
If you are breast feeding (and you probably should be at that age although it is a personal choice) that will make one thing a lot easier. In many ways a 1 year old would be easier than a 2 or 3 year old, which has been done (family from the north 2000-2001 through winter SOBO which we met in GA at the beginning of March. They had a 2 year old, and several more although I can't remember all the ages)...
Gravity
Slo-go'en
05-26-2009, 14:39
Eh gads, your asking for trouble! Just dealing with the baby poop is enough to say forget it! If the kid is 1 now, he will be 2 in 2010 and still too small to walk, so you'll have to carry him and that will be at least a 30 pound load most likely. Add in your gear and all the stuff you need for the kid and you got one serious load to lug.
Can it be done? Maybe. Will it be fun? Not likely.
Put your plans on hold for 10 years or talk grama and grampa into looking after the child while your gone...
You can't possibly be serious.
aufgahoban
05-26-2009, 15:00
My aunt and uncle use to go backpacking with their infant in the Colorado Rockies. They carried her in an authentic 'papoose'. Of course, that meant one of them was carrying the baby and maybe a fanny pack and the other was carrying all the gear. This was well before the days of disposable diapers, so you tell me how much fun that had to be. They never went out for more than a week or so at a time, but they never had any real problems. Not much extra gear involved really as she was still breast fed at the time. They of course, didn't plan for a long excursion and were more just getting out than making any real miles.
I'd worry about the rain/snow/heat/bugs more than anything else. How would you deal with that aspect? I can see a very upset child on about day 8 of hiking in the rain....
Gray Blazer
05-26-2009, 15:17
I hate to be a naysayer, but, he!! no!
One reason being that when you hike a lot on steep trails with rocks and roots and blowdowns, your gonna fall once in a while (maybe I'm the only one) and that's putting your baby in danger right there.
I don't see this being a women's forum issue, so that's why I replied. I'm outta here!
Serial 07
05-26-2009, 15:20
I know this is the "women's forum" but NO! STOP! for pete's sake, dogs prolly shouldn't hike the AT, why on earth would you bring an infant? to be honest, that sounds like a selfish plan, where you aren't really thinking about the health or well being of your baby...do something conventional and cheap if you want to spend some vacation time together...
Blissful
05-26-2009, 15:24
Too hard on the baby. And you. Enjoy parts of it when you can though. And in about 15 years, take him or her with you. I did. :)
I know this is the "women's forum" but NO! STOP! for pete's sake, dogs prolly shouldn't hike the AT, why on earth would you bring an infant? to be honest, that sounds like a selfish plan, where you aren't really thinking about the health or well being of your baby...do something conventional and cheap if you want to spend some vacation time together...
I say go for it!
I guess all the ney sayer's are forgetting where we come from, as well as how many regions of the world continue to live... Sad that we've become so soft!
I say go for it!
I guess all the ney sayer's are forgetting where we come from, as well as how many regions of the world continue to live... Sad that we've become so soft!
lol yeah, those refugees look so happy and healthy.
Aside from the hazards, I just think the trip would suck royally for all involved and probably some that aren't involved.
I mean, take out everything else- do you think a baby should be spending hours and hours in 90+ temps days at a time? And having it's brain jiggled?
Blissful
05-26-2009, 15:33
I say go for it!
I guess all the ney sayer's are forgetting where we come from, as well as how many regions of the world continue to live... Sad that we've become so soft!
Yes and infants die because of what is happening in those countries, which is horrible to say - but is true, from disease, malnutrition, illness, injury. If it doesn't have to be done, why do it? People in other countries do what they do because they have to. I know people who work in Africa, etc
Hiking a six month thru hike on the AT with an infant is far too risky. Why do the risk just to go on a hike? You don't HAVE to. The baby will get nothing out of it. It's for the parents only when it comes right down to it.
I'd rather be safe and "soft" than sorry... Sorry.
Gray Blazer
05-26-2009, 15:42
I say go for it!
I guess all the ney sayer's are forgetting where we come from, as well as how many regions of the world continue to live... Sad that we've become so soft!
.....and do we remember how many infants died on those long treks (not to mention infant mortality in those regions where people continue to live like that)? I am not a fan of DCF (Department of Children and Families) or whatever it's called in your state, but, it seems like there would be an abuse issue there. I would be afraid to chance it.
I am so outta here.
This thread transcends gender. I declare it open to all!
gravityman
05-26-2009, 15:49
Of all the good reasons not to do it, I don't really see them here. If you have experience hiking with a baby, then you would know
1) You aren't going to slip and fall in a way to hurt your baby. If they are in a backpack, they are well protected in there from the old 'butt sit'. If you're carrying them on the front you are plenty careful. You are also much more careful with your foot placement and don't take the risks a 'speed walker' takes. It's just absurd that you shouldn't hike AT ALL with a baby because you might slip and fall. You shouldn't cross the street either...
2)Baby poop is not an issue. They poop general once a day. You hit a trash can on the AT mostly more often than that. It's not hard to deal with this in the woods. Pee dappers are probably 3 or so more times a day (unless you have a baby with a sensitive bottom, and then you might have to change more often). That's 4 diapers a day. It's not that hard and not that heavy.
3)Weight is not a serious issue. Mother will carry about 35 lbs, Dad will carry about 40 lbs. Wasnt' too long ago that was considered a 'normal' to light load. I know, because we've done it. Includes 7 lb baby backpack. You can probably do it a little lighter. This was in Colorado Memorial Day at 12k ft, where you need to be prepared for 20's and snow.
4) Weather - This is the most reasonable newbie to baby-hiking fear, and probably the most important to be able to handle. Without some significant experience, you could easily get in trouble. But my wife and I have been hiking in all 4 season at various altitudes with a baby. At one it's actually easier, as they are small enough to fit in a front carrier. Then you just have to make sure you have a big enough rain jacket and warm jacket to fit around both of you. If you are carrying them in a backpack, make sure to try out the weather proof system. It can take a few tries to get it right, and you have to be ready to bail if things aren't going as planned. But you should always be able to set up the tent and get in the warm bag if the baby starts getting cold.
No way a reasonable mother or dad would not be constantly checking on and aware of the warmth level of their child. It's pretty ingrained.
Below about 6 months you have to be careful about backpack carriers, bike trailers or ski pulks. The baby doesn't have the diaphram muscles to expand the chest in prolonged sitting positions. That seems scary to me and harder to judge than cold hands or feet. We kept him in the front carrier as long as it was comfortable for him and us.
The reasons that I can see for not doing it based on my experience with backpacking and camping with an infant are :
1) no sleep for anyone
2) you will be hiking your baby's hike. It will be a lot slower, you'll be headed in to town more often, and you will be taking more zeros.
3) Weather will impact your hiking miles a LOT
4) It will be a lot harder mentally
But then, you really don't get the chance to spend that much time together expect when you are out there away from the normal distractions of life. I could be a wonderful thing.
You also should be VERY comfortable in the backcountry in various weather conditions and know your gear and how to navigate.
Gravity
What about the heat and humidity? Dump water on your baby all day? Immerse them in every creek you come to?
gravityman
05-26-2009, 15:58
Yes and infants die because of what is happening in those countries, which is horrible to say - but is true, from disease, malnutrition, illness, injury. If it doesn't have to be done, why do it? People in other countries do what they do because they have to. I know people who work in Africa, etc
Hiking a six month thru hike on the AT with an infant is far too risky. Why do the risk just to go on a hike? You don't HAVE to. The baby will get nothing out of it. It's for the parents only when it comes right down to it.
I'd rather be safe and "soft" than sorry... Sorry.
There are plenty of things you don't HAVE to do. You don't HAVE to drive with the infant. Just get a babysitter all the time you need to go out. It's much more likely you and the baby will be killed in a car crash than a hiking trip.
As for 'It's for the parents only' I don't buy it. My son at 2 1/2 very clearly has impressions from some of his earlier camping trips to Moab at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year. Not real memories, but impressions he talks about. Would you expose your 1 year old to pornography or violence? No? Why not he if he 'won't get anything out of it'? Because you know he will...
Gravity
gravityman
05-26-2009, 16:03
What about the heat and humidity? Dump water on your baby all day? Immerse them in every creek you come to?
You have to keep an eye on it, but it's not a reason not to go. We've been hiking with a 1 year old in Florida in May. He did quite well, but we could tell he was getting hot after a while, and we would have to take him out of the carrier periodically. Probably was in mid 80's and very high humidity. Remember, they aren't exericing like you are. We certianly had him in the backpack during the hot hikes for the extra air cirulation for both of us.
Do you think you have to have AC to raise a child in the tropics in the summer time?
Gravity
It can be over 100 degrees for days at a time by the time a NOBO comes through here. High humidity too. It's brutal for an adult and babies are susceptible to heat injuries.
leeki pole
05-26-2009, 16:22
In the famous words of John McEnroe, "you cannot be serious!'
Blissful
05-26-2009, 16:29
Of all the good reasons not to do it, I don't really see them here. If you have experience hiking with a baby, then you would know
1) You aren't going to slip and fall in a way to hurt your baby. If they are in a backpack, they are well protected in there from the old 'butt sit'. If you're carrying them on the front you are plenty careful. You are also much more careful with your foot placement and don't take the risks a 'speed walker' takes. It's just absurd that you shouldn't hike AT ALL with a baby because you might slip and fall. You shouldn't cross the street either...
Gravity
:eek:
That is crazy! How do you know you won't injure the baby in a fall?
The AT is NOT crossing the steet. They are talking a "thru hike." Of course you can and will fall. And who is to say HOW you will fall or how many times in a six month stretch or what will happen either in the fall, unless one had some divine knowledge? I fell sideways, backwards, frontwards. I fell in every state. Sometimes once a week. And not because I was hurrying either. Like it has to do with conditons. Terrain. Rocks. Roots. Mud. Wet. My hubby did fall carying my son on his front long ago. It was awful. We were only on a day hike too. And yes I have backpacked with an infant. A weekend trp and day hikes only. Not six months. And we had things to deal with even with that.
Hiking with your child in the mostly flatlands of FL is not a thru hike of six months on the AT. You should know that too.
As far as my son remembering his hikes as an infant, he doesn't recall.
But he certainly recalls with great fondness when I took him as a teen in '07. And the hikes we took with him from eight years old on up. I waited on my dream. And I'm glad I did so I could share it when he was of age to enjoy it too and so it would birng meaning to his life.
gravityman
05-26-2009, 16:32
Although record temps for Middletown PA are all low 100s in July (they should be through PA by the end of July), the averages are all 86. Although it 'could' be 100, it most likely will be in the 80's. High humidity for sure.
I know babies can be outside in the 80s and 90s without an issue from first hand experiences as long as you take normal precautions. Probably might want to consider a 0 if it's in the 100s both for the baby and the hiker.
Do you seriously think no one should hike with a baby at all in PA during the summer? A thru is just a series of short hikes strung together...
Gravity
leeki pole
05-26-2009, 16:40
Although record temps for Middletown PA are all low 100s in July (they should be through PA by the end of July), the averages are all 86. Although it 'could' be 100, it most likely will be in the 80's. High humidity for sure.
I know babies can be outside in the 80s and 90s without an issue from first hand experiences as long as you take normal precautions. Probably might want to consider a 0 if it's in the 100s both for the baby and the hiker.
Do you seriously think no one should hike with a baby at all in PA during the summer? A thru is just a series of short hikes strung together...
Gravity
Babies don't belong on the trail. How many children do you have, gravity?
Are you speaking from experience? Just curious.
bulldog49
05-26-2009, 16:45
:eek:
That is crazy! How do you know you won't injure the baby in a fall?
The AT is NOT crossing the steet. They are talking a "thru hike." Of course you can and will fall. And who is to say HOW you will fall or how many times in a six month stretch or what will happen either in the fall, unless one had some divine knowledge? I fell sideways, backwards, frontwards. I fell in every state. Sometimes once a week. And not because I was hurrying either. Like it has to do with conditons. Terrain. Rocks. Roots. Mud. Wet. My hubby did fall carying my son on his front long ago. It was awful. We were only on a day hike too. And yes I have backpacked with an infant. A weekend trp and day hikes only. Not six months. And we had things to deal with even with that.
Hiking with your child in the mostly flatlands of FL is not a thru hike of six months on the AT. You should know that too.
As far as my son remembering his hikes as an infant, he doesn't recall.
But he certainly recalls with great fondness when I took him as a teen in '07. And the hikes we took with him from eight years old on up. I waited on my dream. And I'm glad I did so I could share it when he was of age to enjoy it too and so it would birng meaning to his life.
A voice of sense among voices of idiots.
If I knew who the OP actually was, I'd notify Child Protective Services. I'm always amazed how stupid, selfish and irresponsible people can be.
Lone Wolf
05-26-2009, 16:53
We want to thru hike the AT 2010. Because, we'd both be in between jobs and moving, we thought it'd be a perfect time to hike the AT. However, we have a one year old boy. Can the AT be done with a baby? Can anyone recommend any resources to check out?
go ahead and try but your chances of making it the whole way will not be very good at all. more than likely you'll end up way short
gravityman
05-26-2009, 16:55
:eek:
That is crazy! How do you know you won't injure the baby in a fall?
The AT is NOT crossing the street. They are talking a "thru hike." Of course you can and will fall. And who is to say HOW you will fall or how many times in a six month stretch or what will happen either in the fall, unless one had some divine knowledge? I fell sideways, backwards, frontwards. I fell in every state. Sometimes once a week. And not because I was hurrying either. Like it has to do with conditions. Terrain. Rocks. Roots. Mud. Wet. My hubby did fall carrying my son on his front long ago. It was awful. We were only on a day hike too. And yes I have backpacked with an infant. A weekend trip and day hikes only. Not six months. And we had things to deal with even with that.
Hiking with your child in the mostly flatlands of FL is not a thru hike of six months on the AT. You should know that too.
As far as my son remembering his hikes as an infant, he doesn't recall.
But he certainly recalls with great fondness when I took him as a teen in '07. And the hikes we took with him from eight years old on up. I waited on my dream. And I'm glad I did so I could share it when he was of age to enjoy it too and so it would bring meaning to his life.
It's just not reasonable to say you shouldn't hike at all with an infant because you might slip and fall. Yes, you will slip and fall, but unless you are very very unlucky, you won't hurt the baby. I've slipped and fell with the baby here in Colorado (where we do the vast majority of our hiking since we live here). I DON"T do most of my hiking if the flat lands of Florida! But we did a trip there to visit a grandparent, and used that experience to answer the heat/humidity question. Note also that my wife and I through-hiked. We also took our 5 month old up a number of mountains, including Lafayette in NH on a vacation and to the top of a number of 12k and 13k mountains here in CO. Lots and lots of rock scrambling.
Was the fall your husband took awful because your son was seriously injured? That would be very hard to witness. Just the other day my son was playing on his playground and he tripped walking on the playground mulch. I didn't see it happen, but when I turned around I saw him lying there not moving. I was TOTALLY freaked out, yelled and ran to him. My wife was looking at me like I was crazy. She could see he had his eyes open and was just staring at the sky because he saw a plane was going by. I thought that he had hit his head and was unconscious. Scary and terrible feeling!
Despite us having taken him hiking, we haven't hurt him, not even close. I don't KNOW I won't injury a baby in a fall, but I also don't know I won't kill him trying to cross the street or driving to the grocery store either. Doesn't mean I won't do those things. I will be careful doing those things and make sure I take reasonable precautions. I won't stop doing such a simple thing because of an unrealistic fear that it is more dangerous than your own backyard.
A through hike with a 1 year old (or 2 year old since they already have a 1 year old, so he'll be 2 by the time they hike) would be hard, it's not impossible, and it's even already been done. Is it more dangerous to the baby than everyday living? I would say no. Have you seen the statisitics of how many babies get hurt by heavy objects falling on them at home (think TV on top of a dresser).
And if you think that only actual memories count and what you experience as an infant does not shape you, well, we have different philosophies or maybe you didn't reinforce the memories enough : "However, current memory studies reveal that babies are able to remember relatively complex pieces of information at a young age. What's more, your baby's memories can last for a long time, especially if you help him to strengthen them." (http://www.parents.com/baby/development/intellectual/what-does-your-baby-remember/)
gravityman
05-26-2009, 16:59
Babies don't belong on the trail. How many children do you have, gravity?
Are you speaking from experience? Just curious.
One with another due in August. Would I thru hike with a 1 or 2 year old? No way! But that's because I don't want to, not because I think that I would be risking their life and limb.
BTW this post is probably a troll since it was their first post and they just registered.
I still can't believe people think that it would be worth of taking a child away from their parents because they want to hike for 6 months with it. Talk about unreasonable!
The Solemates
05-26-2009, 17:06
we've done plenty of hikes with our daughter. she's 22 months and has been on almost a dozen different hikes varying in length from 1-4 days. her first trip was at 5 weeks. at 10 weeks we took her to the adirondacks in 20 deg weather and lots of snow. we just went this past weekend with her bushwhacking in a wilderness area (no trails), had to ford numerous fast flowing creeks, and even did a little scrambling (with her on my back). we wouldnt consider taking her on a thru-hike, but believe it can be done with the proper planning. honestly, the older a kid gets the harder it would be for them because they will not want to stay in the carrier that long, and will want to be independent etc. approaching 2 years old, they want to walk on their own...that was our biggest problem area this past weekend. the optimum age to do a thru-hike with them when still a baby would be before they turn 1 yrs old IMO.
gravityman
05-26-2009, 17:08
And yes, a 2 year old has already 'hiked' the whole trail, southbound, in winter. We meet then in 2001 while they were finishing. Admitted, I don't want to link my argument with this family, as the dad was a bit loopy. The mother and dad were having quite the quiet argument in Blue Mountain Shelter as the dad wanted to yo-yo (as did the older sons) but the wife wanted off the trail.
From here (http://www.appalachiantrail.org/atf/cf/%7BB8A229E6-1CDC-41B7-A615-2D5911950E45%7D/ATN01May.pdf):
On the Trail in 2000, you might have met…
The Family from the North
The youngest, at age two, was
still nursing and rode on her
mother’s back. From Maine to
Georgia, which they reached in
early 2001 (they did not officially
report completing the A.T.), this
composite family’s odyssey
spurred controversy and
amazement, as well as donations
of food, gear, clothes, rides, and
charity from the Trail community.
The parents, who gave their
names only as Paul and Mary,
alarmed some who met them by
asserting that the Bible warranted
their choice to abandon last names
and official identification (such as
Social Security numbers), a stance
that had gotten them in trouble
with the law back home in Maine.
Their four home-schooled
children, ages seven through
twelve, were oblivious to that
tension, excited to be hiking to
Georgia, making Trail friends, and
carrying full packs on the
adventure of their lives.
gravityman
05-26-2009, 17:12
the optimum age to do a thru-hike with them when still a baby would be before they turn 1 yrs old IMO.
I hoped you would chime in too!
I completely agree with this. We haven't hiked over 4 miles in a few months because our 2 1/2 year old will only ride for about an hour in the pack (while he naps) then he wants to 'hike.' And by hike, I mean pick of rocks, wander off 'cross cun-try' and hike in the 'jungle' and pop out saying 'Here I am. What's that?'
Before about 2 we regularly hiked 8-12 miles once to twice a weekend.
Gravity...
YoungMoose
05-26-2009, 18:04
You can't possibly be serious.
i somewhat agree with you. But at the same time i would try for it. worst comes to worst get off the trail or give your baby to your parents for that time.
Gray Blazer
05-26-2009, 19:01
Of all the good reasons not to do it, I don't really see them here. If you have experience hiking with a baby, then you would know
1) You aren't going to slip and fall in a way to hurt your baby. If they are in a backpack, they are well protected in there from the old 'butt sit'. If you're carrying them on the front you are plenty careful. You are also much more careful with your foot placement and don't take the risks a 'speed walker' takes. It's just absurd that you shouldn't hike AT ALL with a baby because you might slip and fall. You shouldn't cross the street either...
If you fall or slip on ther AT you are more likely to fall down the side of a hill or mountain than on the street. These people were talking about thru-hiking, not just a coupla days. I think it's a bad idea, but, I've been wrong before.
gravityman
05-26-2009, 19:09
If you fall or slip on ther AT you are more likely to fall down the side of a hill or mountain than on the street. These people were talking about thru-hiking, not just a coupla days. I think it's a bad idea, but, I've been wrong before.
I was thinking of the cars being a bit more dangerous, not that actual hiking while crossing the street :) I'm always amazed when I see a family with a stroller zip out in front of me trying to cross the street in our small town, but it's a hard street to cross since it's a pretty major road to Rocky Mountain National Park with RV's and Subaru's cruising down it at 55+. Maybe I look like the kind of person that is sober and will slow down... Or maybe I should get betting on the horn with Child Protective Services every time I see it?
Gravity
Gray Blazer
05-26-2009, 19:13
If any thing bad happens to your baby on the AT you could be held criminally libel. I wouldn't say anything prolly if I ran into you, but, you know there are lots of fanatics who would report you to the authorities. Even a report could alter your life forever. You should not take a chance of being accused of abuse or neglect.
Have you consulted your pediatrician? One insect sting could be fatal.
Grammy and G-Paw are not soft, but, the system will persecute you.
There are too many do gooders out there who are ready to interject what they think is going on rather than what is really going on.
I am not looking down on you. I'm just trying to be a friend and don't want you to ruin your life.
LockJaww
05-26-2009, 19:25
I have to side with the NAY crowd. For lots of reasons listed and some not...this sounds IMO to be a selfishly stupid idea.
gravityman
05-26-2009, 19:38
"Have you consulted your pediatrician? One insect sting could be fatal."
Yes, your baby should NEVER go outside, but should spend it's entire life inside a bubble watching perfectly safe pre-screen streamed video.
ARG! What incredibly terrible advice that I hope no one with a child actually listens to.
G
Gray Blazer
05-26-2009, 19:42
"Have you consulted your pediatrician? One insect sting could be fatal."
Yes, your baby should NEVER go outside, but should spend it's entire life inside a bubble watching perfectly safe pre-screen streamed video.
ARG! What incredibly terrible advice that I hope no one with a child actually listens to.
G
Let me reiterate, one insect bite miles away from a possible, I repeat possible ride to the hospital could be fatal. Why is that terrible advice or are you just busting my chops?
kayak karl
05-26-2009, 20:18
I hate to be a naysayer, but, he!! no!
One reason being that when you hike a lot on steep trails with rocks and roots and blowdowns, your gonna fall once in a while (maybe I'm the only one) and that's putting your baby in danger right there.
I don't see this being a women's forum issue, so that's why I replied. I'm outta here!
that was my first thought, falls! i smashed my cooking gear, my camera and my face. all replaceable.:)
Wise Old Owl
05-26-2009, 20:53
Should have put a vote on this - My 2 cents is NO.
Jim Adams
05-26-2009, 21:24
A voice of sense among voices of idiots.
If I knew who the OP actually was, I'd notify Child Protective Services. I'm always amazed how stupid, selfish and irresponsible people can be.
Child protective services wouldn't do anything about it. It is a conscious decision made by the parents and in no way is endangering the child more than anything else in day to day life. Lots of people hike the trail that have severe allergies that can kill them such as insects. Lots of diabetics hike the trail. The major cause of violent death to infants and children in the US is motor vehicle accidents. Hit the trail, teach them to walk, keep them out of cars! Until all of the nay sayers stop transporting their children in motor vehicles, they are the ones exposing children to danger.
I took my son camping at 2 weeks old. He was so calm and visably enjoyed the cool night air. To this day I see that those early trips help to mold his current personality and life style.
geek
"Have you consulted your pediatrician? One insect sting could be fatal."
Yes, your baby should NEVER go outside, but should spend it's entire life inside a bubble watching perfectly safe pre-screen streamed video.
ARG! What incredibly terrible advice that I hope no one with a child actually listens to.
G
And be sure to only feed them FDA/CFDA certified food, pacifiers in every pocket, strings around the mittens.. Later in life when they begin little league we must ensure that even the tenth place team gets a trophy, because heaven forbid we allow a child to feel failure or even any emotion other than suger fed consumer mania splendor at all times.. Grade schools pushing through units that can't read or even do basic numbers... The three in one stroller/playpen/storage unit that sync's with the class III safety harness that come standard in your new ford taurus.. Don't forget to get the optional duel dvd player and the entire Disney collection...
Yes whatever you do, do not take your baby hiking...
People we have only been living this comfy lifestyle for less than a 100 yrs... Somehow we managed as a species to survive tens of thousands of yrs without a hospital in every community and crosswalk ladies...
The day we built perminent walls to protect us from the big bad outside world we have been in decline ever since. Nothing more than easily controlled consumer sheople...
Baby poop is not an issue. They poop general once a day. You hit a trash can on the AT mostly more often than that.You don't hit a trash can once a day on the AT. Sorry. And baby poop is an issue. You can resolve this issue by packing out dirty diapers, but you will have one or two soiled diapers and a half dozen or so wet diapers a day, in addition to all the baby paraphenalia you lug around when you have a baby.
The logistics of a weekend hike is hard to imagine. To do it for five months is mind-boggling.
I have to think that those thinking it is a great idea to bring a 1-2 year old have never cared for a child that age day in and day out.
Slo-go'en
05-26-2009, 23:44
People we have only been living this comfy lifestyle for less than a 100 yrs... Somehow we managed as a species to survive tens of thousands of yrs without a hospital in every community and crosswalk ladies...
Yes, but they didn't try to carry thier babies 2200 miles in 6 months along rugged and difficult mountian ridge trails.
If they did travel, it was in groups and at a slow pace.
Jayboflavin04
05-27-2009, 00:12
I can think of many reasons in either direction. I think if the two of you are both game try it for a week on a really hard section. That should be enough time for the two of you to make up your mind. Dont hold me to this but I think the youngest person to complete the trail was 6.
I would also say plan on a longer hike with more elaborate heavier gear. I dont think this is impossible or unreasonable, just alot more variables to consider.
Gray Blazer
05-27-2009, 08:16
Child protective services wouldn't do anything about it. It is a conscious decision made by the parents and in no way is endangering the child more than anything else in day to day life. Lots of people hike the trail that have severe allergies that can kill them such as insects. Lots of diabetics hike the trail. The major cause of violent death to infants and children in the US is motor vehicle accidents. Hit the trail, teach them to walk, keep them out of cars! Until all of the nay sayers stop transporting their children in motor vehicles, they are the ones exposing children to danger.
I took my son camping at 2 weeks old. He was so calm and visably enjoyed the cool night air. To this day I see that those early trips help to mold his current personality and life style.
geek
They are not talking about an overnite or a week of camping, They are talking about a thru-hike.
Can we rename this thread? "Theater of the absurd" has a nice ring to it.
And be sure to only feed them FDA/CFDA certified food, pacifiers in every pocket, strings around the mittens.. Later in life when they begin little league we must ensure that even the tenth place team gets a trophy, because heaven forbid we allow a child to feel failure or even any emotion other than suger fed consumer mania splendor at all times.. Grade schools pushing through units that can't read or even do basic numbers... The three in one stroller/playpen/storage unit that sync's with the class III safety harness that come standard in your new ford taurus.. Don't forget to get the optional duel dvd player and the entire Disney collection...
Yes whatever you do, do not take your baby hiking...
People we have only been living this comfy lifestyle for less than a 100 yrs... Somehow we managed as a species to survive tens of thousands of yrs without a hospital in every community and crosswalk ladies...
The day we built perminent walls to protect us from the big bad outside world we have been in decline ever since. Nothing more than easily controlled consumer sheople...
We could just go backwards and have no prenatal care, no immunizations, no child welfare agents, we could make them go to work(preferably in a filthy factory), have child soldiers, not get them braces if needed, not teach them to read, etc. etc. After all, humans didn't die out!
The question that some of you are failing to ask is- Is high heat, humidity, frigid cold, bugs and all the rest optimal conditions for a baby? No. The baby would much rather be in a comfortable environment and all you enablers know it.
We could just go backwards and have no prenatal care, no immunizations, no child welfare agents, we could make them go to work(preferably in a filthy factory), have child soldiers, not get them braces if needed, not teach them to read, etc. etc. After all, humans didn't die out!
The question that some of you are failing to ask is- Is high heat, humidity, frigid cold, bugs and all the rest optimal conditions for a baby? No. The baby would much rather be in a comfortable environment and all you enablers know it.
You call it backwards, I call it forwards, but why split hairs...
I do know that I was first on top of katahdin when I was 16 months old, I know that I lived in a wall tent from age 2-4 while my father built us a house through two Canadian winters, my first time facing class III rapids I was in my mom’s womb who was 5 months pregnant. All of these things I believe have lead me to the path I follow today which is basically live simply so that others can simply live... It's a philosophy that many of us could work harder at...
I don't think it would be an easy challenge to attempt a thru with a 2yr old, and regardless of their success, it sure would be a rewarding experience and a great bonding experience for the entire family.
In the end life is nothing more than a string of compromises and contradictions justified by hypocrisy.
People have been hiking with children of all ages for tens of thousands of years. Problem is, our culture is different. You will have to do alot of your own research in order to figure out what to do should stuff happen, more than if you were at home and could just call someone. Physically, it is easier if you are big and child is small, and you don't carry too much stuff, but 1 year old and two adults should be totally do-able. Assuming no specific health issues, and you just treat it as a series of short hikes, and you are prepared to bail should specific health or safety issues arise, should be do-able.
I think its an awesome idea, but I think having a baby right on the trail is an awesome idea also, but I'm not sure its something I would recommend. You gotta figure these things out on your own. Cheers.
Jim Adams
05-27-2009, 09:56
They are not talking about an overnite or a week of camping, They are talking about a thru-hike.
Exaxctly!!!!!!!
geek
Jim Adams
05-27-2009, 10:09
The question that some of you are failing to ask is- Is high heat, humidity, frigid cold, bugs and all the rest optimal conditions for a baby? No. The baby would much rather be in a comfortable environment and all you enablers know it.
Yes, totally secure in their car seat in the air conditioned comfort of the family vehicle at 60mph just before the head-on collision with the drunk driver. Come on people...life is full of risk day to day and yes, driving with your child in the car is a conscious decision to expose them to the #1 danger for them in America. We're not talking about doing w/o prenatal care or immunizations or caring or education for our children. We have that and it is because of that that a thru hike (of the AT) isn't any more dangerous than day to day living.
I have two wonderful grown children that absolutely love the outdoors and it is because of the oppertunities they had in the wilds when they were young. Would I want to do a thru with a 1 or 2 year old...NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! but I see nothing wrong with the attempt as long as the child is protected and cared for just the same as they would be at home.
geek
Gray Blazer
05-27-2009, 10:15
Jim Adams.....you are entitled to your opinion and that's great. My kids love the woods. A coupla them are even hunters and survivalists.
You are wrong about Child Protective services....if someone reports abuse, the agencies are obligated to check the reorts out even if they are unfounded.
Jim Adams
05-27-2009, 10:17
Jim Adams.....you are entitled to your opinion and that's great. My kids love the woods. A coupla them are even hunters and survivalists.
You are wrong about Child Protective services....if someone reports abuse, the agencies are obligated to check the reorts out even if they are unfounded.
VERY TRUE!
Hiking is NOT abuse!
But driving with them certainly can be twisted into falling into the abuse catagory.
geek
That's what I understood also. A thru-hike. Still do-able if you treat it as a series of short hikes, with perhaps a full motel stop each town to resupply and refresh and assess matters, and extra nights when needed, and to be prepared to bail if health or safety issues arise. Depends alot on the 1 year old. You want something healthy, but maybe not too big. lol
My daughter would have been ideal. Can't remember when she was out of diapers, but she was healthy and very easy to carryown. I wouldn't have done it personally though, not a thru-hike, and didn't of course. My concern wouldn't be so much the logisitics but if some medical issue did arise. Most of that is just new parent paranoia though. Second one maybe, but my wife is not a hiker at all so all this is rather moot.
It's really up to the individual parents. I would say not most hikers cup of tea, and not me or my wife's cup of tea for sure, but a couple of well seasoned thru-hikers or section hikers with a newborn planning their next long hike, I think that's a rather cool idea. There could be a window somewhere between to young to be safe and too big to carry. Once too big too carry you kind of have to wait for the next window, when they are big enough to walk at least 8-10 miles a day.
At least in theory, I don't see why hiker trash can't raise families. ;)
Yes, totally secure in their car seat in the air conditioned comfort of the family vehicle at 60mph just before the head-on collision with the drunk driver. Come on people...life is full of risk day to day and yes, driving with your child in the car is a conscious decision to expose them to the #1 danger for them in America. We're not talking about doing w/o prenatal care or immunizations or caring or education for our children. We have that and it is because of that that a thru hike (of the AT) isn't any more dangerous than day to day living.
I have two wonderful grown children that absolutely love the outdoors and it is because of the oppertunities they had in the wilds when they were young. Would I want to do a thru with a 1 or 2 year old...NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! but I see nothing wrong with the attempt as long as the child is protected and cared for just the same as they would be at home.
geekVery good point. It would be alot safer than driving.
You call it backwards, I call it forwards, but why split hairs...
I do know that I was first on top of katahdin when I was 16 months old, I know that I lived in a wall tent from age 2-4 while my father built us a house through two Canadian winters, my first time facing class III rapids I was in my mom’s womb who was 5 months pregnant. All of these things I believe have lead me to the path I follow today which is basically live simply so that others can simply live... It's a philosophy that many of us could work harder at...
I don't think it would be an easy challenge to attempt a thru with a 2yr old, and regardless of their success, it sure would be a rewarding experience and a great bonding experience for the entire family.
In the end life is nothing more than a string of compromises and contradictions justified by hypocrisy.
Way cool. Love the last sentence.
Jim Adams
05-27-2009, 10:46
My concern wouldn't be so much the logisitics but if some medical issue did arise. Most of that is just new parent paranoia though.
I guess that I seem a little one sided here but I'm not so much one sided as trying to get others to see that there are more sides to the prospect.
I've been a paramedic for a long time. I see children killed or severely injured in vehicle accidents alot. I occassionaly treat them for massive burns due to the lack of parental attention. I arrive to houses where a child is being given CPR after they were found dead in a pool. I treat them for severe injuries recieved after being struck by a vehicle or suffering a bad crash on their bicycle. I arrive to houses where the child is unconscious and has an empty prescription bottle beside them or a dangerous chemical. I see children displaying suicide attempts because of how they "interpret" their lifestyle to be and some are successful. I treat children that are shot by the mysteriously "empty" gun. I treat children that are beaten severely by their parents because the parents don't have a clue how to raise them or even care.....so I hope you can see my point. What is so safe about not letting them thru hike? Home is dangerous! Being in public is dangerous! You can lock your kids in a box to keep them safe or you can keep them home and teach them or you can take them places and let them experience. Almost every person on WB agrees that the trail is safer than their own community...why would that only apply to adults?:-?
geek
Gray Blazer
05-27-2009, 10:49
VERY TRUE!
Hiking is NOT abuse!
But driving with them certainly can be twisted into falling into the abuse catagory.
geek
Who said hiking was abuse? You are the only one twisting driving into abuse. I think I will go argue with a brickwall. It would be easier. Peace out!
Jim Adams
05-27-2009, 10:54
Who said hiking was abuse? You are the only one twisting driving into abuse. I think I will go argue with a brickwall. It would be easier. Peace out!
Then why call child protective services for thru hiking? Obviously your thinking was that thru hiking is child abuse.
It's not that I don't see your side of the equation, I do but I just feel that it is alot of over protection...no more dangerous than staying home.
geek
I guess that I seem a little one sided here but I'm not so much one sided as trying to get others to see that there are more sides to the prospect.
I've been a paramedic for a long time. I see children killed or severely injured in vehicle accidents alot. I occassionaly treat them for massive burns due to the lack of parental attention. I arrive to houses where a child is being given CPR after they were found dead in a pool. I treat them for severe injuries recieved after being struck by a vehicle or suffering a bad crash on their bicycle. I arrive to houses where the child is unconscious and has an empty prescription bottle beside them or a dangerous chemical. I see children displaying suicide attempts because of how they "interpret" their lifestyle to be and some are successful. I treat children that are shot by the mysteriously "empty" gun. I treat children that are beaten severely by their parents because the parents don't have a clue how to raise them or even care.....so I hope you can see my point. What is so safe about not letting them thru hike? Home is dangerous! Being in public is dangerous! You can lock your kids in a box to keep them safe or you can keep them home and teach them or you can take them places and let them experience. Almost every person on WB agrees that the trail is safer than their own community...why would that only apply to adults?:-?
geekExcellent point again geek.
Paramedics and such have a unique perspective on life for sure.
bonnermc
05-27-2009, 11:14
Put a kid in a carseat for 8 hours a day, for 6 months and see how well they take to it. I don't see how carrying a child in a backpack for 6 months would be much different. Yes, you get breaks (you do in a car also), but for the most part, they are in a carrier most of the day. What kind of memories is that going to produce?
Secondly, I'm not a medically inclined person, but I would think that could totally mess up their growth patterns - being stuck in a child carrier. Generally when we take my daughter on day hikes, her legs are kindof straddled and not straight. Six months in that position, the kid would probably be bull legged.
I'd take my 8 year old in a heart beat. We've trained him on the trail and I am fully confident he could handle it, but he walks and can carry some gear himself.
Put a kid in a carseat for 8 hours a day, for 6 months and see how well they take to it. I don't see how carrying a child in a backpack for 6 months would be much different. Yes, you get breaks (you do in a car also), but for the most part, they are in a carrier most of the day. What kind of memories is that going to produce?
Secondly, I'm not a medically inclined person, but I would think that could totally mess up their growth patterns - being stuck in a child carrier. Generally when we take my daughter on day hikes, her legs are kindof straddled and not straight. Six months in that position, the kid would probably be bull legged.
I'd take my 8 year old in a heart beat. We've trained him on the trail and I am fully confident he could handle it, but he walks and can carry some gear himself.It is natural to carry children that age. We are a species built to travel long distances on foot, with our children. That is why they remain small enough to be carried for so long, and why they tend to sleep while doing so. That said, 8 hours a day for 6 months might be excessive, but there are still the other 16 hours in a day, and I think 6 hours a day would be fine especially while the kid is napping. 10 miles a day might still be doable by a fit hiker trash mom and hiker trash dad travelling reasonably light and working as a team. They're not going to set any speed records, but there is absolutely nothing un-natural about hiking with kids. It is about as natural as modern life can still get, if we are naturally so inclined. Smell the coffee.
Gray Blazer
05-27-2009, 11:28
I guess that I seem a little one sided here but I'm not so much one sided as trying to get others to see that there are more sides to the prospect.
I've been a paramedic for a long time. I see children killed or severely injured in vehicle accidents alot. I occassionaly treat them for massive burns due to the lack of parental attention. I arrive to houses where a child is being given CPR after they were found dead in a pool. I treat them for severe injuries recieved after being struck by a vehicle or suffering a bad crash on their bicycle. I arrive to houses where the child is unconscious and has an empty prescription bottle beside them or a dangerous chemical. I see children displaying suicide attempts because of how they "interpret" their lifestyle to be and some are successful. I treat children that are shot by the mysteriously "empty" gun. I treat children that are beaten severely by their parents because the parents don't have a clue how to raise them or even care.....so I hope you can see my point. What is so safe about not letting them thru hike? Home is dangerous! Being in public is dangerous! You can lock your kids in a box to keep them safe or you can keep them home and teach them or you can take them places and let them experience. Almost every person on WB agrees that the trail is safer than their own community...why would that only apply to adults?:-?
geek
Good post.:sun
I wouldn't recommend a commercial child carrier though. I would design and build my own. When I carried Margaret on hikes when she was 2-5 I had this thing that was light and worked fairly well front and back. I prefered it in front. I didn't want her on my back when she was sleeping because I couldn't see her, though I understand there are traditional back carriers that do work well even for infants, with head resting safely against their mothers back. When Margaret was awake she would usually want to get down and play, or get up on my shoulders and navigate. That was cool. People need to figure these things out for themselves. Some people might be better off buying everything, but I think traditionally people were better off developing and building stuff to suit their own needs, and handing the methods down from one generation to the next.
Jim Adams
05-27-2009, 11:32
Good post.:sun
Thank you. I wasn't trying to anger people and am sorry if I hurt anyones feelings but I just want everyone to see that the prosect of thru hiking with a child isn't out of the question...there are always two sides to the story.
Thanks again.
geek
Gray Blazer
05-27-2009, 11:36
Then why call child protective services for thru hiking? Obviously your thinking was that thru hiking is child abuse.
It's not that I don't see your side of the equation, I do but I just feel that it is alot of over protection...no more dangerous than staying home.
geek
Read my posts again. I said I prolly wouldn't call the authorities on them (unless there was REAL child abuse).
I don't think children thru-hiking is abusive.
There are a lot of over zealous people who might call the authorities if they thought there was a neglect or an abuse issue. I don't know about you, but, I don't want the state involved in telling me how to raise my chillens. We had people in the supermarket who were ready to call the authorities because our RAD foster-child was crying (and I did take her out on the FT close to here and she loved it....it was wonderful seeing her so free).
... and its not like their going to take risks if their thru-hike might fall short of 2000 miles in the time available. Lets get real. Its not for everyone but on the surface its a pretty cool idea, and should even be considered somewhat of an ideal, though perhaps somewhat idealistic. I think its refreshing in this world of full of both parents working themselves to the bone with their children in day care. That's the other extreme. People need to work these things out for themselves.
We want to thru hike the AT 2010. Because, we'd both be in between jobs and moving, we thought it'd be a perfect time to hike the AT. However, we have a one year old boy. Can the AT be done with a baby? Can anyone recommend any resources to check out?So getting back to OP, sounds like child would be 2 years old at time of thru-hike. I think if they do some practice hikes now, to work out the materials and methods and logisitics and adapt them as they go they will be very well equipped to do whatever it is they want to do, whether it is a section hike or a thru hike or a good attempt or portion thereof. I think the best thing is to make hiking a part of your lifestyle. Don't put it all off 'til your thru-hike, and don't end it when the thru-hike is done, but of course don't be afraid of trying to fit one or more 'big hikes' into your life sometime other. Such dreams are essential to life worth living, and even better when some are made real.
We only live once. Might as well get on with it. :)
Best Regards.
warraghiyagey
05-27-2009, 11:50
We want to thru hike the AT 2010. Because, we'd both be in between jobs and moving, we thought it'd be a perfect time to hike the AT. However, we have a one year old boy. Can the AT be done with a baby? Can anyone recommend any resources to check out?
When I think back the the facts of my baby/toddlerhood. . . it seems being with my actual parents hiking me along the AT would have been outstanding by comparison. . . . hope if it's what you really want, that you find a way to do it. . . . have a great time :sun:sun:sun
Jim Adams
05-27-2009, 11:57
Read my posts again. I said I prolly wouldn't call the authorities on them (unless there was REAL child abuse).
I don't think children thru-hiking is abusive.
There are a lot of over zealous people who might call the authorities if they thought there was a neglect or an abuse issue. I don't know about you, but, I don't want the state involved in telling me how to raise my chillens. We had people in the supermarket who were ready to call the authorities because our RAD foster-child was crying (and I did take her out on the FT close to here and she loved it....it was wonderful seeing her so free).
LOL!!!!See your point totally. I'd never want closed minded individuals trying to tell me how to raise my children let alone the government!:mad:
geek
On the lighter side, having a 2 year old along would certainly keep you well grounded with reality. :)
I knew a guy and gal that had a 2 year old and lived in a van during his olympic campaign. I forget his name but he was this big giant hippy Finn sailor and his beautiful hippy sailor groupie wife and son. He didn't make the Olympics but he always had a smile on his face and was very competitive and always finished well. When he got in off the water he would head over to the van and if anyone else needed some cheering up after a bad day on the water that's where they would go and there would always be some extra hot soup or lasagna or whatever. It was my brother that sailed against him as I wasn't a Finn sailor, but I remember the long hair and the viking jaw and the big green boat and orange VW Van.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgXNEId2p28
bulldog49
05-27-2009, 12:05
LOL!!!!See your point totally. I'd never want closed minded individuals trying to tell me how to raise my children let alone the government!:mad:
geek
Unfortunatly, it's folks like you that make it necessary for a Protective Service for children. If you can't see how it's wrong to take a 1 year old on a six month hike, it's you who has the closed mind.
"On the lighter side, having a 2 year old along would certainly keep you well grounded with reality. "
Grounded in reality is something you know nothing about.
:(
warraghiyagey
05-27-2009, 12:22
Unfortunatly, it's folks like you that make it necessary for a Protective Service for children. If you can't see how it's wrong to take a 1 year old on a six month hike, it's you who has the closed mind.
Grounded in reality is something you know nothing about.
:(
Dude. . . get over yourself. . . .
Unfortunatly, it's folks like you that make it necessary for a Protective Service for children. If you can't see how it's wrong to take a 1 year old on a six month hike, it's you who has the closed mind.
"On the lighter side, having a 2 year old along would certainly keep you well grounded with reality. "
Grounded in reality is something you know nothing about.
:(Wake up and smell the coffee dude.
Unfortunatly, it's folks like you that make it necessary for a Protective Service for children. If you can't see how it's wrong to take a 1 year old on a six month hike, it's you who has the closed mind.
"On the lighter side, having a 2 year old along would certainly keep you well grounded with reality. "
Grounded in reality is something you know nothing about.
:(
Hmmmm, well I happen to work for our provincial child services and I can assure you, that not one of our protection officers would bat and eye at this plan... In fact, many including myself would encourage the idea..
From my point of view, any activity that focuses the attention of the family on the family is miles ahead of our current society of latch key kids, tv as a babysitter, both parents working non stop to cover the bills, sadly misguided school system, 24 hour news cycle and so on...
I have friends right now who are sailing the globe on a 30 foot sail boat. They already have a 2yr and a 4yr old and just a few weeks ago, they gave birth to their third child at sea.. Yes, HE delivered the baby while at sea. No nurses, no hospital, no 911 emergency service. He had already delivered his previous two children so he knew what to expect... Could things have gone wrong? Of coarse, but things can go wrong anyway even when taking all the precautions and with all the bells and whistles.
It's just a matter of perspective really... I remember seeing women in South Africa walking five miles each way to collect firewood, carrying bundles on their head that I couldn't lift alone, while carrying and breast feeding their baby's.. When asked, they said this is how it has always been done... Makes you wonder what else we have lost with all our technology..
It seems we've lost pretty much everything that they can take away and sell back to us, if we let them.
It seems we've lost pretty much everything they can take away and sell back to us, if we let them.
Who's they? Doesn't matter. More important is who's we.
Best things in life are free so take it back and start livin it.
It seems we've lost pretty much everything that they can take away and sell back to us, if we let them.
I've learned to except it, but it amazes me everyday to see examples of how easy our species falls in line, living under arbritrary rules that ultimately only benifit a few... Strange...
I remember a kid once commenting to me on a hiking trip I was leading that he was jealous of all the animals on the planet... When I asked why he said because their food is free, it grows all around them and they just have to move around and eat it... This kid came from a very poor family, and i'm sure he was hungry often... It never occured to him, and likely many others, that we are merely animals as well, and our food too grows all around us... Somehow we have been convinced it is easier to waste our lives working away from those we care about to earn money to go to a grocery store to purchase the food we require... Makes no sense...
You would have a better handle on it with your training and line of work but it has to do with our being social animals eh. I guess its part of who we are along with like everything else. But we are also supposed to be thinkers too eh. Just that sometimes just like that kid the socialization gets in the way of the logical thought processes. Even after 47 years I'm still dispelling myths of my own. Hiking has helped, but alot of them have had to do with hiking also, which is pretty funny. Marriage too has helped, and of course alot of them had to do with marriage. Myths are part of who we are too I guess.
Fun stuff.
I always like to blame marketing professionals for reducing citizens to mere consumers,
but I suppose that would be like blaming social workers for turning humans into social animals. ;)
I guess if I really want to be free, then I'm the only one to blame. :sun
according to letusmarketyourchild.com :eek:... infants are under 6 months - babies are between 6 and 18 months. toddlers, of course, are 18 months to 3 years old. it goes on from there!- little kids (3-5), kids(5-10), preteens and teens*:banana *sometimes considered young adults (17-19):p
This so-called baby will indeed, in fact, be A TODDLER! on this hike. :sun
Well, I'm glad I could clear that up....:welcome
I met a couple on the PCT once with both a baby and a toddler. Most people here probably won't agree but I say go for it, try it at least. You don't have to go back that many generations to realize people and babies have survived far more than you will encounter on the AT! I think it's so great that yall would even consider this that I had to comment on the ladies thread.:o
The family (they had a couple of lamas) I encountered were loving their trip and had been out for months and well over a thousand miles if memory serves me... What I really remember is how happy they all were and how I kept thinking:-?, That's the luckiest man on the planet.
Blissful
05-27-2009, 14:28
i somewhat agree with you. But at the same time i would try for it. worst comes to worst get off the trail or give your baby to your parents for that time.
He has good sense...
Hurray for grandparents!
:)
gravityman
05-27-2009, 14:32
You don't hit a trash can once a day on the AT. Sorry. And baby poop is an issue. You can resolve this issue by packing out dirty diapers, but you will have one or two soiled diapers and a half dozen or so wet diapers a day, in addition to all the baby paraphenalia you lug around when you have a baby.
The logistics of a weekend hike is hard to imagine. To do it for five months is mind-boggling.
I have to think that those thinking it is a great idea to bring a 1-2 year old have never cared for a child that age day in and day out.
It's pretty damn close. Certainly no more than 3 days in the worst places (Smokies down south, probably 100 mile wilderness up north). It's not a big deal. I've done it for 3 days with my baby.
I don't see why the logistics for a weekend hike with a baby/toddler are hard to imagine. It's really only a few extra things you have to bring. And a thru is not much more than a series of 4-day backpacking trips. We definitely hit a town every 4 days on our through. We might not have always stayed, but we could have, and we probably could have done a lost shorter stretches, but that leaves little time for hiking...
But it's going to take longer than 5 months (most likely) with a baby...
I guess if I really want to be free, then I'm the only one to blame. :sun
Not necassarily... Our social contract has led us down a path that leaves very little room for self-sufficency... There are very few viable alternatives to the "norm" way of life. Specialization and a credit based economy make living an alternative lifestyle suprisingly difficult...
I've been working very hard at becomeing self sufficent, but have realized I will always require some form of income to cover the things I simply can't do myself. And because limited others in my local community are heading in the same direction I am, I don't have support of others who have the skills I don't...
One of the inherent traits of the capitalist system is it ensures compliance and participation. This trait alone ensures it's success until it eventually swallows itself since it is not sustainable.
My hope is that eventually many others will see we have been duped, and seek alternative lifestyles as well, which then can foster a true alternative.
Blissful
05-27-2009, 14:38
There are places on the AT I would never hike with a baby.
I could barely do some of those parts myself.
And up in Maine it's pretty wild and remote with towns miles away from trail crossings.
according to letusmarketyourchild.com :eek:... infants are under 6 months - babies are between 6 and 18 months. toddlers, of course, are 18 months to 3 years old. it goes on from there!- little kids (3-5), kids(5-10), preteens and teens*:banana *sometimes considered young adults (17-19):p
This so-called baby will indeed, in fact, be A TODDLER! on this hike. :sun
Well, I'm glad I could clear that up....:welcome
The family (they had a couple of lamas) I encountered were loving their trip and had been out for months and well over a thousand miles if memory serves me... What I really remember is how happy they all were and how I kept thinking:-?, That's the luckiest man on the planet.
Sorry that last post was a little confusing.:o They had children and the lamas were just along for the trip. The baby was under a year and and the other about three I believe. Not the lamas, the children.
No disrespect to the mama lama.
Blissful
05-27-2009, 14:39
Sorry that last post was a little confusing.:o They had children and the lamas were just along for the trip. The baby was under a year and and the other about three I believe. Not the lamas, the children.
No disrespect to the mama lama.
I couldn't get past the "bleedeep" smilies...
:D
Slo-go'en
05-27-2009, 15:21
And up in Maine it's pretty wild and remote with towns miles away from trail crossings.
Yeah, getting a toodler through the Mahoosics would be a challange! There are places you'd have to use ropes. Don't even want to think about the notch.
Of course, only 2 out of 10 want-to-be "thru-hikers" even make it close to Maine. My bet is they don't make it out of Georgia.
I hope the OP "Teasipper" is reading all this. One thing we don't know is what kind of shape this couple is in, if they have any backpacking experiance and how big and heavy the kid will be at 2 yrs old. Even if they are in top notch condition and experianced backpackers, I can't imagine doing more than about 10 miles a day, and that puts most towns 5-7 days apart. Lots of food to carry.
One thing they should definately do is some practice hikes with the kid. Preferably during 3 days of 40 degree rain over trail with significant elevation changes. That would be a real eye opener!
Yeah, getting a toodler through the Mahoosics would be a challange! There are places you'd have to use ropes. Don't even want to think about the notch.
Of course, only 2 out of 10 want-to-be "thru-hikers" even make it close to Maine. My bet is they don't make it out of Georgia.
I hope the OP "Teasipper" is reading all this. One thing we don't know is what kind of shape this couple is in, if they have any backpacking experiance and how big and heavy the kid will be at 2 yrs old. Even if they are in top notch condition and experianced backpackers, I can't imagine doing more than about 10 miles a day, and that puts most towns 5-7 days apart. Lots of food to carry.
One thing they should definately do is some practice hikes with the kid. Preferably during 3 days of 40 degree rain over trail with significant elevation changes. That would be a real eye opener!
Wow you really make hiking and backpacking sound horrible... Why do you do it?
Slo-go'en
05-27-2009, 15:37
Wow you really make hiking and backpacking sound horrible... Why do you do it?
I keep asking that question after hiking in 40 degree rain for 3 days myself!
bonnermc
05-27-2009, 15:38
Wow you really make hiking and backpacking sound horrible... Why do you do it?
Hope for the best, prepare for the worst
I wonder how far romantic idealism will get them... 10 miles? 25 miles? It's kind of telling that in all the stunts that hikers have tried in the past decades, nobody has ever been dumb enough to try to thru hike with a baby.
Very good point. It would be alot safer than driving.
How do you know? Nobody has ever done it.
You need a Nanny to help with your kid during the hike. Send a PM to Mrs Baggins.
Yes, totally secure in their car seat in the air conditioned comfort of the family vehicle at 60mph just before the head-on collision with the drunk driver. Come on people...life is full of risk day to day and yes, driving with your child in the car is a conscious decision to expose them to the #1 danger for them in America. We're not talking about doing w/o prenatal care or immunizations or caring or education for our children. We have that and it is because of that that a thru hike (of the AT) isn't any more dangerous than day to day living.
I have two wonderful grown children that absolutely love the outdoors and it is because of the oppertunities they had in the wilds when they were young. Would I want to do a thru with a 1 or 2 year old...NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! but I see nothing wrong with the attempt as long as the child is protected and cared for just the same as they would be at home.
geek
Yeah, driving is dangerous. So something else stupid is fine? Brilliant logic:rolleyes:
I wonder how far romantic idealism will get them... 10 miles? 25 miles? It's kind of telling that in all the stunts that hikers have tried in the past decades, nobody has ever been dumb enough to try to thru hike with a baby.
I thought I read that someone else had already done it. I think Gravityman mentioned it, discussing a family from Maine...
So because you think it is impossible it is dumb? Whatelse do you disapprove of so I can start reorganizing my life...
You need a Nanny to help with your kid during the hike. Send a PM to Mrs Baggins.At least they'd have someone the same height to play with. :eek:
I thought I read that someone else had already done it. I think Gravityman mentioned it, discussing a family from Maine...
So because you think it is impossible it is dumb? Whatelse do you disapprove of so I can start reorganizing my life...
People that throw their baby up in the air and catch them while laughing like jackasses. If Randy Moss can drop a ball then you can drop your baby.
I think cosleeping is dangerous too, but then again I roll around a lot.
People that smoke around their kids.
gravityman
05-27-2009, 15:57
And yes, a 2 year old has already 'hiked' the whole trail, southbound, in winter. We meet then in 2001 while they were finishing. Admitted, I don't want to link my argument with this family, as the dad was a bit loopy. The mother and dad were having quite the quiet argument in Blue Mountain Shelter as the dad wanted to yo-yo (as did the older sons) but the wife wanted off the trail.
From here:
On the Trail in 2000, you might have met…
The Family from the North
The youngest, at age two, was
still nursing and rode on her
mother’s back. From Maine to
Georgia, which they reached in
early 2001 (they did not officially
report completing the A.T.), this
composite family’s odyssey
spurred controversy and
amazement, as well as donations
of food, gear, clothes, rides, and
charity from the Trail community.
The parents, who gave their
names only as Paul and Mary,
alarmed some who met them by
asserting that the Bible warranted
their choice to abandon last names
and official identification (such as
Social Security numbers), a stance
that had gotten them in trouble
with the law back home in Maine.
Their four home-schooled
children, ages seven through
twelve, were oblivious to that
tension, excited to be hiking to
Georgia, making Trail friends, and
carrying full packs on the
adventure of their lives.
gravityman
05-27-2009, 16:01
People that throw their baby up in the air and catch them while laughing like jackasses. If Randy Moss can drop a ball then you can drop your baby.
I think cosleeping is dangerous too, but then again I roll around a lot.
People that smoke around their kids.
Wow, you need to have a kid before you can start commenting on simple things like the shear joy of throwing your kid in the air while they are giggling or the necessity of co-sleeping a sick, colicky child.
gravityman
05-27-2009, 16:03
Pffft... they sound like well balanced folks. And a two year old that's still breastfeeding?
You have no idea about kids, do you? It's not usual, and very healthy. But it's not 100% the social norm. However WHO recommends breast feeding until at least 2 :
Adequate nutrition during infancy is essential for lifelong health and wellbeing. Infants should be exclusively breastfed for the first six months of life to achieve optimal growth, development and health. Thereafter, to meet their evolving nutritional requirements, infants should receive nutritionally adequate and safe complementary foods, while continuing to breastfeed for up to two years or more. (http://www.who.int/topics/infant_nutrition/en/)
Wow, you need to have a kid before you can start commenting on simple things like the shear joy of throwing your kid in the air while they are giggling or the necessity of co-sleeping a sick, colicky child.
No, I don't. You don't have to smoke crack to know it's a bad idea.
You have no idea about kids, do you? It's not usual, and very healthy. But it's not 100% the social norm. However WHO recommends breast feeding until at least 2 :
Adequate nutrition during infancy is essential for lifelong health and wellbeing. Infants should be exclusively breastfed for the first six months of life to achieve optimal growth, development and health. Thereafter, to meet their evolving nutritional requirements, infants should receive nutritionally adequate and safe complementary foods, while continuing to breastfeed for up to two years or more. (http://www.who.int/topics/infant_nutrition/en/)
Didn't know that.
Too hard on the baby. And you. Enjoy parts of it when you can though. And in about 15 years, take him or her with you. I did. :)
You don't necessarily have to wait 15 years. I hiked 700 miles or so with an 11 year old in '93. He did 270 miles of Maine at age nine. Eight year olds have done the trail. I met a 10-year-old once on the summit of Whitecap in Maine who had walked up from Georgia with his Mom and older siblings. My kids were all backpacking between the ages of three and six. None were ever carried. But we never figured on big miles while they were very young.
But I would never attempt a serious backpack with an infant. For many reasons, not the least of which, because I never wanted my kids to know that being carried was an option.
Weary
flemdawg1
05-27-2009, 17:38
Been hiking w/ my kids from 6 months to 2 years and up to 9yo now. Will it be slow? yup, especially if their 2yo is like mine and wants to walk a good bit. A thru hike is a series of 4-5 day hikes. And a 4-5 day hike on pretty much all the AT w/ a 1-2yo child is entirely doable (I'm guessing here btw). Take an emergency beacon and lotsa cash (longer hike time). Have fun.
My vote is no. And yes I am a father of three wee ones.
Gray Blazer
05-28-2009, 08:15
Pffft... they sound like well balanced folks. And a two year old that's still breastfeeding?
I like breast feeding.:)
I like breast feeding.:)
And you don't have to have them to know it's a good ideal :) :) !
8 year old breastfeeding :eek:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxv6R9fUO74
We should leave the discussion of when to stop breastfeeding to the mother and her child. ;)
We should leave the discussion of when to stop breastfeeding to the mother and her child. ;)
the child's mouth is full...
Gray Blazer
05-28-2009, 08:51
8 year old breastfeeding :eek:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxv6R9fUO74
I knew a 9 year old that still breast fed. wasn't a pretty sight, unfortunately. I still like breast feeding.:)
There's a 70 or so year old guy in the Miramichi who still goes by the name "Tit-La".
He called his Mom "La", and when he was hungry he would holler...
Gray Blazer
05-28-2009, 09:13
I like breast feeding.:)
Sorry, ladies. I forgot this is the women's forum.:o
Oops. Roger that. Sorry ladies.
lol oops
The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters
We want to thru hike the AT 2010. Because, we'd both be in between jobs and moving, we thought it'd be a perfect time to hike the AT. However, we have a one year old boy. Can the AT be done with a baby? Can anyone recommend any resources to check out?[/quote]
Welcome to WB although by now you probably think that means "Were Bull****" cuz all the kind resources and positive recommendations you have got.Pay em no attention and take that young one out on the AT as far as you can and be as safe as possible.Slap the **** outta anybody that give you any lip on the trail!
We want to thru hike the AT 2010. Because, we'd both be in between jobs and moving, we thought it'd be a perfect time to hike the AT. However, we have a one year old boy. Can the AT be done with a baby? Can anyone recommend any resources to check out?
Welcome to WB although by now you probably think that means "Were Bull****" cuz all the kind resources and positive recommendations you have got.Pay em no attention and take that young one out on the AT as far as you can and be as safe as possible.Slap the **** outta anybody that give you any lip on the trail![/quote]
Agreed!
We want to thru hike the AT 2010. Because, we'd both be in between jobs and moving, we thought it'd be a perfect time to hike the AT. However, we have a one year old boy. Can the AT be done with a baby? Can anyone recommend any resources to check out?
has your son achieved object permanence?
I will, as usual, come in somewhere in the middle of Yes and No.
To deal with a few of the specific concerns that people raise:
1) Heat is less of an issue with babies than cold. When our kids were tiny we lived in a hot place without a/c. Imagine that! Keep hydrated and it will all work out.
2) Poop. You have to deal with your own poop. Since when are trash cans the best place to deposit human feces? Cloth diapers and maybe a disposable diaper liner (pack it out), and you'll be fine.
3) Falling. I took a few falls on the AT, but had I been hiking at the age I was when I had my first one-year-old, I would have been considerably more nimble and probably would have fallen a lot less disasterously. Had I been hiking with my 25-year-old husband, well he was a mountain goat at that age. The Mahoosic Notch would have been a playground, and he would have had no difficulty relaying the baby and the gear through there. See the next point...
4) Start NOBO and the southern terrain is not particularly difficult to walk over. By the time you actually get to the tough stuff, you'll either be adept at getting over it, or will have stopped hiking, and it won't be an issue.
For more info about the Ross'es lama trek with toddlers:
http://www.llama.org/CindyRoss/default.htm
And, as always, I will ask, have you taken even a weekend hike with the baby? A week? Before making extensive thru-hiking preparations, I would suggest experimenting with shorter journeys to see how that goes for you. Can you solve the logistical problems? Is it joyful?
That's sound advice Marta. The other interesting piece of the puzzle is how to reduce and to distribute the weight of gear and toddler. Two adults definitely make it easier. The commercial child carriers and combination child carriers / backpacks tend to be rather heavy. Depends also on the size of the toddler, and the relative size of mom and dad. Might be able to get away with mom always carrying toddler with a carrier customized for the purpose, plus a few extra items, and dad carrying everything else. 2-2.5 year olds can run 25 to 35 pounds, so perhaps 30-40 with the few extra items. Ultralight gear for 2.5 people might run about the same. The Go-Light Pinnacle or similar light high volume pack might do the job carrying the bulk of the gear, eliminating the prospect of the additional weight of an overbuilt carrier/backpack. If they happened to both be the same size then they could switch back and forth but I'm not sure of any advantage in doing that. As you said, this summer and fall is the time to start hiking and try and work those things out. The child will be getting bigger and heavier all the while, but mom might gradually get stronger as she works out the best carrier system, and dad can work out how to reduce the weight and carry all the stuff for 2.5 people for 3-5 days at time.
World-Wide
05-29-2009, 13:06
We want to thru hike the AT 2010. Because, we'd both be in between jobs and moving, we thought it'd be a perfect time to hike the AT. However, we have a one year old boy. Can the AT be done with a baby? Can anyone recommend any resources to check out?
Have hiked in many countries, but have never hiked the A.T. so I guess my opinion won't rank high as the other experienced A.T. hikers. Early in my Air Force career, I worked nutritional medicine and dealt with many pregnant women and thier babies. There was a two week gap in military housing when the air-condition transferred to heat and the heat transferred to air-conditioning. The temperature only had a 10 degree flux, but the new mother's brought their babies in because they stated change in mood/condition. I couldn't imagine what your baby would go thru when there were 20-50 degree temps changes not to mention the rain, sleet or snow that you may encounter early on that adults have a hard time dealing with! :( Please think long and hard before heading out! :-?
??? How on earth did we ever survive before central heating and air conditioning ???
Lets be real.
I'll bet the kid would be alot less likely to develop allergies or asthma after such a trek.
Keep in mind also that after they start at Springer, its not like they can't stop and go home at any point along the way. It's just a series of 4-5 day hikes, late spring through early fall. There are also alternate routes around some of the higher peaks in bad weather. There is nothing un-natural about this. Sure, a tent would make good sense, and probably a bug net if bugs get bad, but we have to get away from the notion that there is something un-natural about living outdoors. Doing stuff like hiking the AT is spending time in a more natural environment, one that we are better suited for, not the other way around. It's not like the Antartica, or a Lunar Landing, or Day Care.
I'll bet the kid would be alot less likely to develop allergies or asthma after such a trek.
Keep in mind also that after they start at Springer, its not like they can't stop and go home at any point along the way. It's just a series of 4-5 day hikes, late spring through early fall. There are also alternate routes around some of the higher peaks in bad weather. There is nothing un-natural about this. Sure, a tent would make good sense, and probably a bug net if bugs get bad, but we have to get away from the notion that there is something un-natural about living outdoors. Doing stuff like hiking the AT is spending time in a more natural environment, one that we are better suited for, not the other way around. It's not like the Antartica, or a Lunar Landing, or Day Care.
Do you suppose our memory loss of human history stems from A/C, over stimulation by electrical appliances, and microwave contamination from our cell phones?
It is unbelievable and sad that so many people think living outdoors is so threatening and dangerous... People it is where we came from! Yes take precautions, but what could be more natural and healthy than day in day out fresh air?
It almost seems like we are getting trolled, except most people today actually think that way.
What is amzing is how many people think that way even on a hiking forum.
teasipper
05-29-2009, 14:27
... thanks for all the replies- how wonderful! I do think I am going to hold off on the AT. I got too intoxicated in dream land. I am sure we all know how that is (with any hope) We will do some other back packing trips, but not the AT-not right now. Happy trails!
Have fun with your toddler, and hope you all enjoy whatever hiking and camping trips you do go on. Sweet dreams!
THE LITTLE ROBBER GIRL
from Hans Andersen
They drove on through a dark wood, where the chariot lighted up the way
and blinded the robbers by its glare; it was more than they could bear.
'It is gold, it is gold!' they cried, and darting forward, seized the
horses, and killed the postilions, the coachman, and footman. They then
dragged little Gerda out of the carriage.
'She is fat, and she is pretty; she has been fattened on nuts!' said the
old robber woman, who had a long beard, and eyebrows that hung down over
her eyes. 'She is as good as a fat lamb, and how nice she will taste!'
She drew out her sharp knife as she said this; it glittered horribly.
'Oh!' screamed the old woman at the same moment, for her little daughter
had come up behind her, and she was biting her ear. She hung on her
back, as wild and as savage a little animal as you could wish to find.
'You bad, wicked child!' said her mother, but she was prevented from
killing Gerda on this occasion.
'She shall play with me,' said the little robber girl; 'she shall give
me her muff, and her pretty dress, and she shall sleep in my bed.' Then
she bit her mother again and made her dance. All the robbers laughed and
said, 'Look at her dancing with her cub!'
'I want to get into the carriage,' said the little robber girl, and she
always had her own way because she was so spoilt and stubborn. She and
Gerda got into the carriage, and then they drove over stubble and stones
further and further into the wood. The little robber girl was as big as
Gerda, but much stronger; she had broader shoulders, and darker skin,
her eyes were quite black, with almost a melancholy expression. She put
her arm round Gerda's waist and said--
'They shan't kill you as long as I don't get angry with you; you must
surely be a Princess!'
'No,' said little Gerda, and then she told her all her adventures, and
how fond she was of Kay.
The robber girl looked earnestly at her, gave a little nod, and said,
'They shan't kill you even if I am angry with you. I will do it myself.'
Then she dried Gerda's eyes, and stuck her own hands into the pretty
muff, which was so soft and warm.
At last the chariot stopped: they were in the courtyard of a robber's
castle, the walls of which were cracked from top to bottom. Ravens and
crows flew in and out of every hole, and big bulldogs, which each looked
ready to devour somebody, jumped about as high as they could, but they
did not bark, for it was not allowed. A big fire was burning in the
middle of the stone floor of the smoky old hall. The smoke all went up
to the ceiling, where it had to find a way out for itself. Soup was
boiling in a big caldron over the fire, and hares and rabbits were
roasting on the spits.
'You shall sleep with me and all my little pets to-night,' said the
robber girl.
When they had something to eat and drink they went along to one corner
which was spread with straw and rugs. There were nearly a hundred
pigeons roosting overhead on the rafters and beams. They seemed to be
asleep, but they fluttered about a little when the children came in.
'They are all mine,' said the little robber girl, seizing one of the
nearest. She held it by the legs and shook it till it flapped its wings.
'Kiss it,' she cried, dashing it at Gerda's face. 'Those are the wood
pigeons,' she added, pointing to some laths fixed across a big hole high
up on the walls; 'they are a regular rabble; they would fly away
directly if they were not locked in. And here is my old sweetheart Be,'
dragging forward a reindeer by the horn; it was tied up, and it had a
bright copper ring round its neck. 'We have to keep him close too, or he
would run off. Every single night I tickle his neck with my bright
knife, he is so frightened of it.' The little girl produced a long knife
out of a hole in the wall and drew it across the reindeer's neck. The
poor animal laughed and kicked, and the robber girl laughed and pulled
Gerda down into the bed with her.
'Do you have that knife by you while you are asleep?' asked Gerda,
looking rather frightened.
'I always sleep with a knife,' said the little robber girl. 'You never
know what will happen. But now tell me again what you told me before
about little Kay, and why you went out into the world.' So Gerda told
her all about it again, and the wood pigeons cooed up in their cage
above them; the other pigeons were asleep. The little robber girl put
her arm round Gerda's neck and went to sleep with the knife in her other
hand, and she was soon snoring. But Gerda would not close her eyes; she
did not know whether she was to live or to die. The robbers sat round
the fire, eating and drinking, and the old woman was turning
somersaults. This sight terrified the poor little girl. Then the wood
pigeons said, 'Coo, coo, we have seen little Kay; his sledge was drawn
by a white chicken, and he was sitting in the Snow Queen's sledge; it
was floating low down over the trees, while we were in our nests. She
blew upon us young ones, and they all died except we two; coo, coo.'
'What are you saying up there?' asked Gerda. 'Where was the Snow Queen
going? Do you know anything about it?'
'She was most likely going to Lapland, because there is always snow and
ice there! Ask the reindeer who is tied up there.'
'There is ice and snow, and it's a splendid place,' said the reindeer.
'You can run and jump about where you like on those big glittering
plains. The Snow Queen has her summer tent there, but her permanent
castle is up at the North Pole, on the island which is called
Spitzbergen!'
'Oh Kay, little Kay!' sighed Gerda.
'Lie still, or I shall stick the knife into you!' said the robber girl.
In the morning Gerda told her all that the wood pigeons had said, and
the little robber girl looked quite solemn, but she nodded her head and
said, 'No matter, no matter! Do you know where Lapland is?' she asked
the reindeer.
'Who should know better than I,' said the animal, its eyes dancing. 'I
was born and brought up there, and I used to leap about on the
snowfields.'
'Listen,' said the robber girl. 'You see that all our men folks are
away, but mother is still here, and she will stay; but later on in the
morning she will take a drink out of the big bottle there, and after
that she will have a nap--then I will do something for you.' Then she
jumped out of bed, ran along to her mother and pulled her beard, and
said, 'Good morning, my own dear nanny-goat!' And her mother filliped
her nose till it was red and blue; but it was all affection.
As soon as her mother had had her draught from the bottle and had
dropped asleep, the little robber girl went along to the reindeer, and
said, 'I should have the greatest pleasure in the world in keeping you
here, to tickle you with my knife, because you are such fun then;
however, it does not matter. I will untie your halter and help you
outside so that you may run away to Lapland, but you must put your best
foot foremost, and take this little girl for me to the Snow Queen's
palace, where her playfellow is. I have no doubt you heard what she was
telling me, for she spoke loud enough, and you are generally
eavesdropping!'
The reindeer jumped into the air for joy. The robber girl lifted little
Gerda up, and had the forethought to tie her on, nay, even to give her a
little cushion to sit upon. 'Here, after all, I will give you your fur
boots back, for it will be very cold, but I will keep your muff, it is
too pretty to part with. Still you shan't be cold. Here are my mother's
big mittens for you, they will reach up to your elbows; here, stick your
hands in! Now your hands look just like my nasty mother's!'
Gerda shed tears of joy.
'I don't like you to whimper!' said the little robber girl. 'You ought
to be looking delighted; and here are two loaves and a ham for you, so
that you shan't starve.'
These things were tied on to the back of the reindeer; the little robber
girl opened the door, called in all the big dogs, and then she cut the
halter with her knife, and said to the reindeer, 'Now run, but take care
of my little girl!'
Gerda stretched out her hands in the big mittens to the robber girl and
said good-bye; and then the reindeer darted off over briars and bushes,
through the big wood, over swamps and plains, as fast as it could go.
The wolves howled and the ravens screamed, while the red lights quivered
up in the sky.
'There are my old northern lights,' said the reindeer; 'see how they
flash!' and on it rushed faster than ever, day and night. The loaves
were eaten, and the ham too, and then they were in Lapland.
Blissful
05-29-2009, 14:51
Sorry, ladies. I forgot this is the women's forum.:o
Glad I saw this as I was about to comment -
I think you guys have made your point over an over, along with story telling and everything inbetween. How about moving along to a men's forum now?
:rolleyes:
I think this thread is over, is it not?
Blissful
05-29-2009, 14:55
Well you guys seem to want to keep it going.
I think good points have been made about three pages ago. And Marta's
I didn't even look at this thread until this morning. It had all the makings of a train wreck.